Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I DETEST THIS FILM ..WITH A PASSION [Christopher Hitchens on the Passion of the Christ]
The Mirror ^ | February 27, 2004 | Christopher Hitchens

Posted on 02/27/2004 3:40:31 AM PST by ejdrapes

I DETEST THIS FILM ..WITH A PASSION

A FEW years ago, Mel Gibson got himself into an argument after uttering a series of crude remarks that were hostile to homosexuals.

Now he has made a film that principally appeals to the gay Christian sado-masochistic community: a niche market that hasn't been sufficiently exploited.

If you like seeing handsome young men stripped and tied up and flayed with whips, The Passion Of The Christ is the movie for you.

Some people used to go to Ben-Hur deliberately late, and just watch the chariot race while skipping the boring quasi-Biblical stuff. Alas, that isn't possible with this film.

Along with the protracted torture comes a simple-minded but nonetheless bigoted version of the more questionable bits of the Gospels. It's boring all right - much of the film is excruciatingly tedious - but it also manages to be extraordinarily nasty.

Gibson claims that the Holy Ghost spoke through him in the directing of this movie, and that everything in it is from the Bible. I very much doubt the first claim, and I can safely say that the second one is false.

The Bible does not have an encounter between Jesus and a sort of Satanic succubus figure in the Garden of Gethsemane. The Bible does not have a raven pecking out the eye of one of the crucified thieves. The Bible does not have Judas pursued to his suicide by a horde of supernatural and sinister devil-children.

Moreover, whatever the Bible may say, the Roman authorities in Jerusalem were not minor officials in a Jewish empire, compelled to obey the orders of a gang of bloodthirsty rabbis.

It was Rome that was boss. Indeed, Pontius Pilate was later recalled by the Emperor Tiberius for the extreme brutality with which he treated the Jewish inhabitants (and you had to be quite cruel to get Tiberius to raise his eyebrows).

YET Gibson is evidently obsessed with the Jewish question, and it shows in his film.

It also shows when he's off-screen. Invited by Peggy Noonan - a sympathetic conservative interviewer - in Reader's Digest to say what he thought of the Holocaust, Gibson replied with extreme cold-ness that a lot of people were killed in the Second World War and no doubt some of them were Jews. Shit happens, in other words. He doesn't seem to grasp the point that the war was started by a political party which believed in a Jewish world conspiracy.

He doesn't go as far as his father, who says that the Holocaust story is "mostly fiction" and that there were more Jews at the end of the war than there were at the beginning, but he does say that his old man has "never told me a lie".

And he does say that he bases his film on the visions of the Crucifixion experienced by a 19th-century German nun, Anne-Catherine Emmerich, who believed that the Jews used the blood of Christian children in their Passover rituals. (In case you have forgotten, the setting of the film is the Jewish Passover.)

Yesterday, as the movie opened, a Pentecostal church in Denver, Colorado, put up a big sign on its marquee saying: "Jews Killed The Lord Jesus." Nice going.

In order to keep up this relentless propaganda pressure, Gibson employs the cheap technique of the horror movie director.

Just as you think things can't get any worse, he shoves in a gruesome surprise.

The flogging scene stops, and you think: "Well, that's over." And then the sadistic guards pick up a new kind of flagellating instrument, and start again.

The nails go through the limbs, one by one, and then, for an extra touch, the cross is raised, turned over and dropped face-down with its victim attached, so that the nails can be flattened down on the other side.

The vulg-arity and sensationalism of this would be bad enough if there wasn't a continual accompaniment of jeering, taunting Jews who want more of the same.

The same cynical tactic has been applied to the marketing of the movie.

Gibson is well known to be a member of a Catholic extremist group that rejects the Pope's teachings and denounces the Second Vatican Council (which, among other things, dropped the charge that all Jews were Christ-killers).

He went to some trouble to spread alarm in the Jewish community, which rightly suspected that the film might revive the old religious paranoia.

HE showed the film at the Vatican, and then claimed that the Pope had endorsed it - a claim that the Vatican has flatly denied, but then every little helps.

Then he ran a series of screenings for right-wing fundamentalists only, and refused to show any tapes to anyone who wasn't a religious nut. (It took me ages to get around the ban and get hold of a pirated copy, and I was writing for the Hollywood issue of Vanity Fair.)

Having secured a huge amount of free publicity in this way, and some very lucrative advance block bookings from Christian fundamentalist groups, Gibson now talks self-pityingly about how he has risked his fortune and his career, but doesn't care if he "never works again" because he's done it all for Jesus.

The clear message I get from that is that he'll be boycotted by sinister Hollywood Jews. So it's a win-win for him: big box office or celebrity martyrdom. With any luck, a bit of both. How perfectly nauseating.

In a widely publicised concession, Gibson said that he'd removed the scene where the Jewish mob cries out that it wants the blood of Jesus to descend on the heads of its children's children.

This very questionable episode - it is mentioned in only one of the four gospels - has in fact not been cut. Only the English subtitle has gone. (The film is spoken in Aramaic and Latin, though Roman soldiers actually spoke a dialect of Greek.)

So when the film is later shown, in Russia and Poland, say, or Egypt and Syria, there will be a ready-made propaganda vehicle for those who fancy a bit of torture and murder, with a heavy dose of Jew-baiting thrown in.

Gibson knows very well that this will happen, and he'll be raking it in from exactly those foreign rights to the film.

So my advice is this. Do not go.

Leave it to the sickoes who like this sort of thing, and don't fill the pockets of the sicko who made it.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christopherhitchens; closethomo; hehatesmotherteresa; homotendencies; morfordlover; moviereview; thepassion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-470 next last
To: Qwinn
Have you heard anyone, -anyone-, utter a protest when someone blames all Christians for the Holocaust?

That's a ridiculous straw man. No one who gets listened to by ANYBODY makes a claim like that. You're ginning up nonsense to create some false sense of equivalency.
121 posted on 02/27/2004 5:12:21 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: PaulJ
C'mon. Hitchens' point is that, when the film is showed in other language groups, the subtitle for that statement can appear in the local language. The statement is SPOKEN in the film, but the English version does not have the English subtitles. When I see the film next week, I'll look for this.
122 posted on 02/27/2004 5:12:25 AM PST by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
Gibson claims that the Holy Ghost spoke through him in the directing of this movie, and that everything in it is from the Bible. I very much doubt the first claim, and I can safely say that the second one is false.

Hitchens is wrong on both counts. Mel said that he was inspired by the Holy Spirit, as I would hope we would be when making a film about Jesus. Mel has also said he used several sources; the Gospels, traditions of the Church, and some ideas of his own. It's called artistic license, Mr. Hitchens.

No one should be surprised at this review; Hitchens has been antagonistic toward Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular for a long time. He could not stand Mother Theresa; he always considered her a charlatan. Kinda shows you where his mind is, huh?

123 posted on 02/27/2004 5:12:50 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater; Qwinn
However, your argument is completely ludicrous. Jews did kill Christ. That is an historical fact. They wanted Him dead, and they made sure it happened.

No one is saying that ALL Jews killed Christ. No one is saying that today's Jews killed Him. But Jews did kill Him, make no mistake.

Qwinn? That's what I'm talking about.
124 posted on 02/27/2004 5:13:00 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: HostileTerritory
What are you talking about? I have been called a Nazi by liberals because of my Christianity and/or a conservative. It is not uncommon that liberals make that connection.
125 posted on 02/27/2004 5:14:14 AM PST by Americathy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Americathy
Hollywood is standing back and letting him do his thing, as far as I can tell, with individual grumbling. If Mel has the money and the studio to make his own pictures he doesn't really need them or owe them anything. It's kind of funny how despite the opposition of the massive Hollywood conspiracy, this movie still set records for its opening and got into thousands of theaters. If that's censorship, I want Hollywood to censor my next movie.
126 posted on 02/27/2004 5:14:16 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
though Roman soldiers actually spoke a dialect of Greek

This guy is a fool if he thinks that. The Roman upper classes admired the Greeks, all educated Romans learned Greek, and a Roman like Pontius Pilate would have studied Greek extensively and spoken it among his educated friends (much as young men in the British Empire used to sling Latin around - only more so.)

It is clear from the classical writers that slaves, gladiators, and soldiers spoke a Vulgar Latin that was the ancestor of the Romance languages (as the legionaries spread around the Empire, were given land, and settled.) Suetonius and Martial, among others, mention it. Think of the difference today between the language of a highly educated university professor and some teenage skateboarding dude on the street corner.

127 posted on 02/27/2004 5:14:21 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
I'm with you on this. If his atheism were as total as he believes it to be, there would be no anger, just indifference. And he would not be laying the responsibility for all the suffering in the world at God's feet, but at man's. Because after all it is man's own stupidity that drives him in such a case. The fact that he see's religion as one of the basest delusions without holding man accountable for that delusion says quite a lot.

After all the opposite of love isn't hate, its indifference.
128 posted on 02/27/2004 5:14:54 AM PST by Kay Syrah (nice finish)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: keats5
Nothing happened on Good Friday that Jesus didn't allow.
The last word on this subject, as far as I'm concerned. Amen.
129 posted on 02/27/2004 5:14:57 AM PST by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: ejdrapes
A FEW years ago, Mel Gibson got himself into an argument after uttering a series of crude remarks that were hostile to homosexuals.

What is Hitchens talking about?
130 posted on 02/27/2004 5:15:10 AM PST by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Americathy
Excuse me, that kind of rhetorical b.s. "Republicans are Nazis" is stupid, but it is most definitely not the same as a statement like "All Christians are responsible for the Holocaust." Besides, I doubt they're really calling you a Nazi because you've accepted Christ as your savior--of course it's the politics in play.
131 posted on 02/27/2004 5:15:41 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
What the heck does child molestation have to do with any of this? Are you off your rocker? Of course it's wrong. I think child molestors should all be castrated. But what the heck does it have to do with this thread? Did you forget to put lithium in your cereal this morning?

Now take the attitude you've displayed with this response, and recognize all the Christians you were talking to earlier have just as much right to feel the same way...and for the same reason.

132 posted on 02/27/2004 5:15:46 AM PST by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
(If you answer yes, and you also believe that "the Jews killed Christ", then you're wrong, you don't have the slightest idea of what it means.)

Please enlighten us...

133 posted on 02/27/2004 5:15:54 AM PST by carton253 (I have no genius at seeming.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rudy45
I agree with you completely. Let me state that I have very little doubt (and this is even given the fact that I'm agnostic) that the Biblical account is accurate and there were Jewish leaders at the time whose power was threatened and who wanted him taken out. It makes sense, and I think that at that point in history -any- group of -any- race that was in power would have had -some- leaders that would have responded to someone like Jesus in just such a way. To doubt that almost seems silly to me. What would one -expect-, unless you think that Jews from 2000 years ago were so -super-human and ethical and selfless than any other group in existence that they couldn't even have bad -individuals-?

That said, even though I absolutely believe that some Jews -did- lead Jesus to the Romans and requested that he be killed, many others were apalled by that act, and it has -absolutely zero bearing on any Jew today-.

That should be obvious.

What really bothers me, though, is putting myself in the shoes of a Christian, and watching people say things like "You have to denounce anti-Semitism because there's been so much of it from Christians in the past". That's like telling Jews that they have to denounce that their ancestors killed Jesus. Like telling them that, due to their ancestor's actions, they owe an -apology-. Christians alive today don't have -any- obligation to apologize for pogroms committed in the middle ages, I'm sorry. You (generic you) can't believe that they -do- have to apologize for the sins of their fathers, and Jews -don't-, not without the exact same bias that is being railed against.

But all the focus is on blame being passed down through generations on the Jews, and none on the fact that the entire controversy is happening -because- people are passing guilt down through generations to Christians. Especially when the Christians of today are such fervent supporters of Israel. That's what makes it really appalling to me.

Qwinn
134 posted on 02/27/2004 5:16:34 AM PST by Qwinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanMother
Right. Vulgar Latin sounds a lot like Italian, which is why much of the Latin in the film sounded Italian. Very accurate.
135 posted on 02/27/2004 5:17:10 AM PST by Americathy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
He gave some interviews to a Spanish newspaper where he said something like "homosexuals are disgusting, they're gross, they have sex BACK THERE" and pointed to his ass.
136 posted on 02/27/2004 5:17:20 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
However, your argument is completely ludicrous. Jews did kill Christ. That is an historical fact. They wanted Him dead, and they made sure it happened.

Some Jews did want Him dead, He Himself was a Jew. Somoe Jews followed Him and became the Church.
137 posted on 02/27/2004 5:17:58 AM PST by Cronos (W2K4!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: Qwinn
Let me state that I have very little doubt (and this is even given the fact that I'm agnostic) that the Biblical account is accurate

That's curious... on what do your base your faith in the Bible's historical accuracy if you call yourself an agnostic?
138 posted on 02/27/2004 5:19:48 AM PST by HostileTerritory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: samtheman
I hear silence coming from mainstream Christianity, and it's every bit as deafening as the silence of Islam in the wake of terrorist attacks.

Huh? I've been hearing this denial that the Jews are responsible from Christians for the last few weeks, even since Mel began to be attacked by the libs about this subject. It's possible they have been drowned out by the media drumbeat, but they're there.

139 posted on 02/27/2004 5:20:02 AM PST by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Americathy
Once I had an Italian client (this came about through a VERY strange set of circumstances).

I spoke Latin to him, and he spoke Italian (slowly!) to me, and we got along very well (once he stopped laughing at me.)

140 posted on 02/27/2004 5:21:03 AM PST by AnAmericanMother (. . . sed, ut scis, quis homines huiusmodi intellegere potest?. . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 461-470 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson